Mr. Gavin Lawlor:

I can help the Deputy with the last question fairly simply. People make mistakes. Inspectors make mistakes. Planning authorities make mistakes. They miss things. Boards make mistakes. The courts have pointed that out. Why is there such a difference? That is why. If, however, the Deputy looks at the statistics of the board and goes back through even this whole controversy, he will find it has been horribly consistent on the grant refusal rate and the overturn rate. There are situations in which an inspector will form a view on an issue on balance. That view may be in full agreement with what the planning authority might have done on balance, but the board may have formed the view that there are other concerns that are maybe more important than the inspector. The board might weigh up the environment or sustainability argument more than, say, an economic argument or an employment argument in a debate. There is a need for that. The inspectors make recommendations; they do not make decisions. The planning officers make recommendations; they do not make the decisions. The decisions are made by the director of services or the chief executive at local authority level and the board, ultimately. It is the board that makes the decisions. Recommendations are given to it. It can choose to accept or to refuse them. What is important is that there is transparency in the decision-making and that one gets a note from the board stating why it disagrees, if it does disagree; if there is a condition not included, why it is not included; or if the board has added a condition, why it has been added. Transparency is the key.